Difference between revisions of "User:Infinity Linden/OGP Trust Phase 0"

From Second Life Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(27 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Important Note'''
* This page describes the near term "trust objectives". In this context, "Near Term" means issues relating to features that already existed in Second Life in September 2008, and how they will be implemented to support non-Linden Agent and Region domains. Discussions regarding the future of Trust in OGP (including, but not limited to: Rights Expression Languages, revised permissions for in-world objects, distributed third-party authentication, integrating OpenID or SAML, etc.) should be directed towards [[User:Infinity_Linden/OGP_Trust_Model|the OGP Trust Model page]].
=Introduction=
=Introduction=


'''todo:''' add introduction here. best done after the content is produced.
This page describes "near term" trust mechanisms for OGP protocol participants. The objective is not to define the ultimate trust or security system, or even to try to enumerate all trust issues; for that, please visit the [[User:Infinity_Linden/OGP_Trust_Model|OGP Trust Model Page]]. This page is intended to describe "near term" trust issues and how participants in the OGP Beta program may use features that currently exist to establish "trust" between region and agent domains. So.. the [[User:Infinity_Linden/OGP_Trust_Model|OGP Trust Model Page]] is where you will find information regarding Rights Expression Languages, revised permissions for in-world objects, distributed third-party authentication, integrating OpenID or SAML, etc. This page is where you'll find discussions regarding how client applications, agent domains and region domains establish a base level of trust through the use of X.509 certificates used in conjunction with TLS / HTTPS.
 
'''todo:''' continue fleshing out this section. maybe add links to "howtos" when we've reached agreement between LL, OpenSim, PyOGP


=How We Authenticate Protocol Actors=
=How We Authenticate Protocol Actors=
Line 9: Line 9:


The diagram to the right shows how different protocol actors in OGP establish trust. The diagram shows the three major classes of protocol actors: client applications, agent domains and region domains. The objective of this section is to describe how actors establish trust in remote protocol participants. The concept of "trust" is intimately related to the authentication technology used by client and server software, but can be seen to be more than simple authentication. As we'll see in the section describing the proposed registration authority, authentication "reflects" trust, it does not create it.
The diagram to the right shows how different protocol actors in OGP establish trust. The diagram shows the three major classes of protocol actors: client applications, agent domains and region domains. The objective of this section is to describe how actors establish trust in remote protocol participants. The concept of "trust" is intimately related to the authentication technology used by client and server software, but can be seen to be more than simple authentication. As we'll see in the section describing the proposed registration authority, authentication "reflects" trust, it does not create it.
'''note:''' this diagram needs a bit of an update. it does a poor job describing how capabilities are trusted and it doesn't describe how client applications trust the region domain servers.


==Authenticating Client Application Users to Agent Domain Servers==
==Authenticating Client Application Users to Agent Domain Servers==
Line 27: Line 25:


==Authenticating Client Applications to Region Domain Servers==
==Authenticating Client Applications to Region Domain Servers==
==Authenticating Agent Domain Servers to Region Domain Servers==
 
==Authenticating Region Domain Servers to the Agent Domain==
Region domain servers SHOULD NOT make "sensitive" services available to unauthenticated clients.
 
Client Applications use the possession of a capability by the client as proof of authorization to perform a particular operation.
 
Ergo, if you operate a Region Domain, do not issue sensitive caps to a client directly. Give the sensitive cap to an agent domain and let it give the cap to the client.
 
==Authenticating Agent Domain Servers to Client Applications==
 
Hosts implementing the agent domain portion of OGP SHOULD make services available via HTTPS / TLS. As mentioned above, Linden Lab servers will reject some protocol interactions if they do not take place over HTTPS (or some other secure transport).
 
Before trusting an Agent Domain server, Client Applications SHOULD check the following to ensure that the server being communicated with is actually the Agent Domain server that it claims to be:
 
* if the server's server certificate uses an IP address as part of the X.509 Subject Name, is this the same IP address the peer is using? (i.e. - does the IP address of the server match the IP address in the X.509 Subject Name?)
* if the server's server certificate uses a DNS Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) as part of the X.509 Subject Name, does the IP address of the peer match the A record retrieved when doing a reverse DNS lookup?
* is the server's server certificate valid? (i.e. - is the current date between the validFrom and validTo dates in the server's certificate and every certificate in the chain up to a trusted certificate.
* is the server's server certificate explicitly trusted for authentication? (i.e. - is the server's certificate or a certificate in the server's certificate's chain explicitly trusted for authentication?)
 
It should be noted that these are all common options with most (if not all) TLS implementations, including OpenSSL.
 
It also implies that:
 
* the Client Application SHOULD  maintain a list of "authentication trust-points" or certificates identifying organizations explicitly trusted by the Client Application for the purpose of authentication.
* <strike>the Client Application SHOULD NOT accept certificates that contain a wild-card in the Subject Name field of the certificate</strike>
 
==Authenticating Agent Domain Servers and Region Domain Servers to Each Other==
 
Sensitive communications between agent domain hosts and region domain hosts MUST be over a secure transport like TLS / HTTPS.
 
When an agent domain host initiates communication with a region domain host, it must verify the identity of the region domain via the region domain host's server certificate. The process listed in the Client Application to Agent Domain section above should be followed for agent to region communications.
 
<strike>To authenticate the agent domain to the region, the agent domain should provide its client certificate to the region domain host. The region domain may then authenticate the agent domain using the same process as above.
 
When a region domain host initiates communication with an agent domain host, the process is reversed. The Agent Domain's server certificate is validated first (by the region domain host), then the region domain's client certificate is validated (by the agent domain host).</strike>
 
Agent Domains should access sensitive resources ONLY via capabilities issued by the region domain.
 
Clever readers will note that this implies:
 
* the ability for both the agent domain and the region domain to generate server certificates for their systems.
* (and) the ability for both agent and region domains to manage a list of "authentication trust points" in a certificate chain.
 
Fortunately, this is a relatively well known process (though, administratively, it can be "less than easy" with existing open source tools.)


=Specific Issues With Linden Lab Software=
=Specific Issues With Linden Lab Software=
'''note:''' this section introduces ideas for discussion. no decision has yet been made to implement this proposal. no decision to do so is likely without community discussion.
==Linden Lab Self Signed Certificate For Agent and Region Domain Authentication==
==Linden Lab Self Signed Certificate For Agent and Region Domain Authentication==
Blergh. Okay, you caught us. We're using self-signed certificates.
In an environment where we were the only ones offering region hosting, agent hosting and making viewer software, this was not an unreasonable choice. But now we have to open this process up to allow interoperability with trusted agent and region domains.
In terms of the OGP Beta, this is likely not too onerous an administrative task. ['''note:''' the person who just wrote that is not, in fact, the person who would be fulfilling service requests, so your mileage may vary.] In the OGP Beta, we are not (yet) attempting to transer potentially sensitive assets and there are a relatively small number of region and agent domain operators.
So... the proposal is we (the community in general) move beyond Self-Signed Certs except for testing purposes.
The simplest way to meet the "move beyond self-signed certificates" requirement is for Linden Lab to operate a registration authority for the purpose of beginning the certification process for external agent and region domain operators.
Or we could use some set of common well-known CAs, like Verisign or somebody.  Although they like charge money.
'''todo:''' fill out this section a touch more, maybe describing the process of registering a peer agent or region domain.
=Specific Issues With OpenSim Software=
=Specific Issues With OpenSim Software=
'''note:''' Terevus, Zha, et al. do you want to add a few notes here?
'''Teravus:''' One thing to note here, however..  is you'll need to add your '''CA''' to the client's '''app_settings/CA.pem''' until the Linden/Verisign/Other CA process is worked out sufficiently.  The directions for setting it up are in *svn*/share/junkCA
Certain things don't work in SSL mode now.  For example: teleporting from Vaak to a SSL enabled OpenSimulator region fails because Vaak rejects self signed certificates and upon reading the response, it terminates the connection.  (So in OpenSimulator, you'll see Vaak invoke the cap, but it'll still fail because vaak doesn't read the response)
==Self Signed Certificates for Agent and Region Domain Authentication==
==Self Signed Certificates for Agent and Region Domain Authentication==
==Proposed Registration Authority for OpenSim Operators==
==Proposed Registration Authority for OpenSim Operators==
=Specific Issues With PyOGP Software=
=Specific Issues With PyOGP Software=
'''Note:''' ''Tao... Sai... I know we discussed this a bit... but i'm blanking on what we said... so feel free to add stuff here, otherwise i'm going to add my best guess regarding how we want to handle it''
'''Note:''' ''Tao... Sai... I know we discussed this a bit... but i'm blanking on what we said... so feel free to add stuff here, otherwise i'm going to add my best guess regarding how we want to handle it''
=Discussions=
=Discussions=
==Gridnauts IRC 12 Sept 2008==
*Gridnauts IRC
*[11:28am] infinity__ joined the chat room.
**Sepember [[User:Infinity_Linden/Gridnauts_2080913|13]]
*[11:29am] Ter_AFK: hi infinity__
*[11:29am] infinity__: hola amigos
*[11:29am] infinity__: y amigas
*[11:29am] infinity__: so whump was telling me there was a discussion about certs going on
*[11:29am] infinity__: and though i usually don't like to admit it
*[11:30am] infinity__: i was Bell Canada's rep to the X.509 committee for a while
*[11:30am] infinity__: so i'm partially responsible
*[11:30am] Saijanai: j'accuse
*[11:30am] Ter_AFK: yes.    Essentially, the client uses libcurl which imports ./app_settings/CA.pem to validate the SSL cert
*[11:31am] infinity__: cool. okay. that should be pretty easy to fix
*[11:31am] infinity__: so when the client talks to the AD or the Region
*[11:31am] infinity__: it doesn't use client side certs
*[11:32am] infinity__: so you shouldn't have to have the big list of "approved roots"
*[11:32am] infinity__: (to serve requests)
*[11:32am] infinity__: but if you're making a request
*[11:33am] infinity__: yeah... libcurl will freak if it finds an untrusted cert (or unless you turn cert checking off)
*[11:33am] Ter_AFK: I was able to add my own CA to the end of CA.pem and get the client to talk with my self signed https server, however..    that's not scalable
*[11:33am] infinity__: why not?
*[11:34am] Ter_AFK: Lets say someone else wants to connect to my server..    they'll need it added to theirs as well
*[11:34am] infinity__: hmm
*[11:34am] infinity__: oh oh
*[11:34am] infinity__: yeah the clients have cert checking turned on
*[11:34am] infinity__: well
*[11:34am] infinity__: nothing you can do about that
*[11:34am] Ter_AFK: ..  so..    a list of trusted CA's would be good..  or potentially a LL CA signing service.
*[11:34am] infinity__: it might be worth it to spin a root CA for the OpenSim community
*[11:35am] infinity__: include that cert in the distro
*[11:35am] infinity__: and have a process by which OpenSim operators can request a server cert
*[11:35am] infinity__: or.. hmm... i wonder if freessl is still operating...
*[11:36am] infinity__: in theory... you shouldn't need a new self-signed cert
*[11:37am] infinity__: you need either a self-signed or a derived cert who's root is in the list of "trusted certs"
*[11:37am] Ter_AFK: right.
*[11:37am] infinity__: it's the same problem of getting the upsetting "i don't trust this web site's cert" dialog when doing https in yer favorite browser
*[11:38am] Ter_AFK: I wouldn't object to running a CA signing service assuming that my CA ended up in the client's list of roots.  Yep.  It's the same issue.
*[11:38am] infinity__: lemme check if "meave's cert shack and internet bait shop" is still in the list of trusted roots for Firefox
*[11:39am] Ter_AFK: heh
*[11:39am] infinity__: yeah.. so in a sense... you're running into the "problem as defined"
*[11:39am] infinity__: X.509 was introduced to separate trust of your software provider from trust of the network operators
*[11:40am] infinity__: so yeah... it's a touch of a pain...
*[11:40am] infinity__: do you know about OpenCA?
*[11:40am]•Ter_AFK goes to look
*[11:41am] infinity__: it was a touch confusing to use, but slightly less confusing than OpenSSL command line options
*[11:41am] infinity__: well.. actually very less confusing than OpenSSL... but don't tell Ben Laurie i said that
*[11:42am]•Ter_AFK didn't find the OpenSSL command line options that confusing.. but used various tutorials and peicemeal web pages to figure it out
*[11:42am] infinity__: and i'm gonna see if i can dig up some cert references from cryptonomicon.net
*[11:43am] infinity__: yeah... look at recent examples... not the docs. i've found the docs are out of sync with the code, but recent examples tend to work well
*[11:44am] Ter_AFK: ultimately, we must do one of three things here though..  locate a suitable signing CA (that the client accepts), start our own(and insert that into app_settings/CA.pem) and sign people's certs ourself, use a Linden CA
*[11:45am] infinity__: well... of course.. if we were going to launch a Linden CA
*[11:45am] infinity__: i wouldn't be able to mention it
*[11:45am]•Ter_AFK nods
*[11:46am] infinity__: but if we did... one might assume we would have a peering agreement requirement and acceptance of a cert policy and a certification practice statement
*[11:46am] infinity__: so for some folk, such a CA would work
*[11:46am] infinity__: but it would be nice to find a solution for peeps who just wanna put up a couple sims to do some testing
*[11:46am]•Ter_AFK nods again
*[11:47am] infinity__: or are philosophically unaligned with the Linden IPR stance
*[11:47am] infinity__: we could just write up a statement about the problem, put it on the wiki, and wait for Gareth and Tao to deploy a solution
*[11:47am] Ter_AFK: ZhaEwry any comments?
*[11:48am] Ter_AFK: hehe
*[11:49am] infinity__: okay... looks like Chris over at MozFound noticed the joke of a cert i put in their standard distro
*[11:50am] infinity__: which is good 'cause it means they're taking this stuff much more serious than the old days
*[11:50am] Ter_AFK: [11:50am] infinity__: and Ter_AFK... you're just using "stock" libcurl, right?
*[11:51am] Ter_AFK: the client is using libcurl..    but I can't really dig into it to find out what it's using
*[11:51am] infinity__: i'm starting to get curious if the old DoD certs are still distributed with it
*[11:52am] infinity__: and
*[11:52am] Ter_AFK: in .NET, I have cert validation turned off, but it doesn't resolve issues with the client doing things in SSL on OpenSimulator..  because the client has cert checking on...  and..  I have no idea where to go for a signing that would work with it.
*[11:52am] infinity__: you saw this reference, right? http://curl.haxx.se/docs/sslcerts.html
*[11:53am] infinity__: wait... our client has cert checking turned on? ++Leyla
*[11:54am] infinity__: yeah... we need a "real" solution to this... not just the idea that we're going to turn cert checking off
*[11:54am] Ter_AFK: routines:SSL3_GET_SERVER_CERTIFICATE:certificate verify failed  on the debug console.
*[11:54am] infinity__: yup
*[11:54am] infinity__: that's OpenSSL getting angry
*[11:54am]•Ter_AFK nods. A real solution would be needed. yep.
*[11:54am] infinity__: hmm
*[11:55am] infinity__: also
*[11:55am] infinity__: we shouldn't be using SSL3, this is a new application of certiness... we should be using TLS with "real" ciphers
*[11:55am] infinity__: and PFS turned on by default
*[11:58am] infinity__: my recommendation is to build different profiles... one that has no cert checking between ad and region.. on that has it turned on and uses the official Linden root... another that references whatever cert is appropriate for a group of public AD/RD operators
*[11:58am] infinity__: oh oh.. just dawned on me... maybe this is the kind of service we should be expecting the RD to provide
*[12:00pm] infinity__: i'll pitch the powers that be here on a plan that has LL operating as an RA for an "official LL Partners that agree to honour permissions metadata" tree and a "recognized OpenSim operators" tree
*[12:01pm] Ter_AFK: thanks.  If that means that we have to run a signing service..  then ok..  I'll pitch it to the devs also
*[12:01pm] infinity__: that way we could delegate issuance of RD certs for folk like osgrid.net et al. to osgrid.net
*[12:02pm] whump_: interop island is back up
*[12:02pm] infinity__: then if people didn't like our process, they're more than happy to build a version of the OS viewer that has their root certs
*[12:02pm] infinity__: same story as Firefox
*[12:04pm] infinity__: cause the last thing i want is for people to think that the "proper" thing to do is to turn cert checking off
*[12:04pm] infinity__: that's bad mojo
*[12:04pm] Ter_AFK: heh
*[12:04pm]•Ter_AFK  turned cert checking off in OpenSimulator to allow derez_avatar with vaak
*[12:06pm] infinity__: yeah.. that's what i'm talking about... i totally understand why you did it, but it's bad long-term practice and all of us LL, OpenSim devs, Tao, Gareth, osgrid.net, etc. have to make it easy for folk to "do the right thing"
*[12:29pm] Saijanai: infinity__: , BlueWall , Ter_AFK ,  would you like me to post this discussion in the OGP beta page?
*[12:30pm] BlueWall: ++
*[12:30pm] Ter_AFK: I'm ok with it..  but make sure infinity__ is before you do.
*[12:30pm] Saijanai: KK
*[12:30pm] infinity__: sure... i'm acually working on https://wiki.secondlife.com/w/index.php?title=User:Infinity_Linden/OGP_Trust_Phase_0 right now
*[12:30pm] infinity__: i'm thinking it's for ONLY stuff that's gonna happen real soon
*[12:30pm] infinity__: no discussion about MPEG.21, new permissions models, etc.
*[12:31pm] infinity__: (i.e. we have those discussions elsewhere, this is for things we all pretty much agree on in the near term)
*[12:31pm] Saijanai: well, for me, the best next step would be to port group IM into the AD
*[12:31pm] infinity__: cool. good to know that kinda stuff
*[12:32pm] Saijanai: with everyone realizing that it almost certainly won't survive but we need to get a handle on how it behaves
*[12:32pm] infinity__: hey Sai... gimme about an hour to hack on the Phase 0 page
*[12:32pm] infinity__: then post the discussion to the bottom of it
*[12:33pm] Saijanai: KK
*[1:01pm] infinity__: it was designed to support just that
*[1:19pm] leyla: are we still looking at certs infinity?
*[1:19pm] leyla: i think the viewer always checks
*[1:28pm] infinity__: cool. that's what we're supposed to do
*[1:29pm] infinity__: (check the cert for trust and validity)
*[1:53pm] whump_: Ter_AFK: did you get your questions about Certs answered, or a least pointed towards a plan of action?
*[1:54pm] Ter_AFK: Yes.  I pitched the action to the devs.
*[1:55pm] whump_: cool
*[1:55pm] Ter_AFK: thanks.  It gives me a track to run on.
*[2:15pm] infinity__: hey Sai... i put the outline for "near term trust" up at https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Infinity_Linden/OGP_Trust_Phase_0
*[2:15pm] infinity__: if you wanna add the previous discussion to the discussion section at the bottom
*[2:15pm] infinity__: i think you can edit that major section
*[2:16pm] infinity__: while i edit the other major sections
*[2:16pm] infinity__: just hit the edit links near the section titles
*[2:16pm] infinity__: and not the one at the top of the page




[[Category:AW_Groupies]]
[[Category: Pyogp]]
[[Category:Grid_Interoperability]]
[[Category:Pyogp_Kitchen_Sink]]
[[Category:AW Groupies]]
[[Category:Grid Interoperability]]
[[Category:AW Groupies User Pages]]

Latest revision as of 14:45, 18 January 2009

Introduction

This page describes "near term" trust mechanisms for OGP protocol participants. The objective is not to define the ultimate trust or security system, or even to try to enumerate all trust issues; for that, please visit the OGP Trust Model Page. This page is intended to describe "near term" trust issues and how participants in the OGP Beta program may use features that currently exist to establish "trust" between region and agent domains. So.. the OGP Trust Model Page is where you will find information regarding Rights Expression Languages, revised permissions for in-world objects, distributed third-party authentication, integrating OpenID or SAML, etc. This page is where you'll find discussions regarding how client applications, agent domains and region domains establish a base level of trust through the use of X.509 certificates used in conjunction with TLS / HTTPS.

todo: continue fleshing out this section. maybe add links to "howtos" when we've reached agreement between LL, OpenSim, PyOGP

How We Authenticate Protocol Actors

simplified trust model

The diagram to the right shows how different protocol actors in OGP establish trust. The diagram shows the three major classes of protocol actors: client applications, agent domains and region domains. The objective of this section is to describe how actors establish trust in remote protocol participants. The concept of "trust" is intimately related to the authentication technology used by client and server software, but can be seen to be more than simple authentication. As we'll see in the section describing the proposed registration authority, authentication "reflects" trust, it does not create it.

Authenticating Client Application Users to Agent Domain Servers

Before an end user may enter the virtual world, they must authenticate themselves. This is just as true for automated systems as it is for human users. Three authentication techniques are described in the authentication section of the OGP specification. When this document was written, only the hashed password authenticator was deployed on the OGP beta grid. It is also thought that for the "near term", Challenge Response and PKCS#5 PBKDF authenticators will not be deployed. It is important to note that the Second Life main grid and canonical Second Life viewer do not implement OGP at this time. Users will need to download the Open Grid Viewer from the Open Grid Beta Viewers page.

Authentication begins with the user providing their password to the client application. The client application in turn constructs an agent_login message that it sends to the agent domain's LoginURI. The LoginURI for Linden Lab's OGP Beta is predefined as the default in the Open Grid Viewer. Users wishing to use a different Agent Domain may use the --loginuri option on the command line when invoking the viewer.

The details of how an avatar or account name and password are established between the end user and the agent domain is beyond the scope of this document. Linden Lab provides a web resource for account creation end users may access via a traditional web browser. Before Linden Lab will create an account, the end user must agree to a Terms of Service document and view any outstanding Critical Messages. Account Creation interactions take place over a HTTPS TLS-Encrypted transport. This is to ensure that eavesdroppers have a limited opportunity to intercept the new user's password.

Other Agent Domain operators are free to implement any policy they wish with respect to the security of agent credentials. But it should be noted that the use of HTTPS to transport agent_login requests is STRONGLY RECOMMENDED. Services deployed by Linden Lab will refuse to to agent_login requests that do not use HTTPS. As described later in this document, Linden Lab region domains may reject protocol messages from agent domains that do not require the use HTTPS for username/password establishment or for agent_login requests.

It is also important to note that the Open Grid Beta Viewer from Linden Lab will refuse to attempt to connect to non-https LoginURI. Agent domain operators who do not wish to use HTTPS based LoginURIs will need to distribute their own viewer application.

So... to recap. End users authenticate themselves to agent domains by using a username / password pair. How an agent domain establishes the trustworthiness of the end user is beyond the scope of this document. HTTPS is your friend. Linden Lab's servers may snub you if you don't like HTTPS.

Authenticating Client Applications to Region Domain Servers

Region domain servers SHOULD NOT make "sensitive" services available to unauthenticated clients.

Client Applications use the possession of a capability by the client as proof of authorization to perform a particular operation.

Ergo, if you operate a Region Domain, do not issue sensitive caps to a client directly. Give the sensitive cap to an agent domain and let it give the cap to the client.

Authenticating Agent Domain Servers to Client Applications

Hosts implementing the agent domain portion of OGP SHOULD make services available via HTTPS / TLS. As mentioned above, Linden Lab servers will reject some protocol interactions if they do not take place over HTTPS (or some other secure transport).

Before trusting an Agent Domain server, Client Applications SHOULD check the following to ensure that the server being communicated with is actually the Agent Domain server that it claims to be:

  • if the server's server certificate uses an IP address as part of the X.509 Subject Name, is this the same IP address the peer is using? (i.e. - does the IP address of the server match the IP address in the X.509 Subject Name?)
  • if the server's server certificate uses a DNS Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) as part of the X.509 Subject Name, does the IP address of the peer match the A record retrieved when doing a reverse DNS lookup?
  • is the server's server certificate valid? (i.e. - is the current date between the validFrom and validTo dates in the server's certificate and every certificate in the chain up to a trusted certificate.
  • is the server's server certificate explicitly trusted for authentication? (i.e. - is the server's certificate or a certificate in the server's certificate's chain explicitly trusted for authentication?)

It should be noted that these are all common options with most (if not all) TLS implementations, including OpenSSL.

It also implies that:

  • the Client Application SHOULD maintain a list of "authentication trust-points" or certificates identifying organizations explicitly trusted by the Client Application for the purpose of authentication.
  • the Client Application SHOULD NOT accept certificates that contain a wild-card in the Subject Name field of the certificate

Authenticating Agent Domain Servers and Region Domain Servers to Each Other

Sensitive communications between agent domain hosts and region domain hosts MUST be over a secure transport like TLS / HTTPS.

When an agent domain host initiates communication with a region domain host, it must verify the identity of the region domain via the region domain host's server certificate. The process listed in the Client Application to Agent Domain section above should be followed for agent to region communications.

To authenticate the agent domain to the region, the agent domain should provide its client certificate to the region domain host. The region domain may then authenticate the agent domain using the same process as above.

When a region domain host initiates communication with an agent domain host, the process is reversed. The Agent Domain's server certificate is validated first (by the region domain host), then the region domain's client certificate is validated (by the agent domain host).

Agent Domains should access sensitive resources ONLY via capabilities issued by the region domain.

Clever readers will note that this implies:

  • the ability for both the agent domain and the region domain to generate server certificates for their systems.
  • (and) the ability for both agent and region domains to manage a list of "authentication trust points" in a certificate chain.

Fortunately, this is a relatively well known process (though, administratively, it can be "less than easy" with existing open source tools.)

Specific Issues With Linden Lab Software

note: this section introduces ideas for discussion. no decision has yet been made to implement this proposal. no decision to do so is likely without community discussion.

Linden Lab Self Signed Certificate For Agent and Region Domain Authentication

Blergh. Okay, you caught us. We're using self-signed certificates.

In an environment where we were the only ones offering region hosting, agent hosting and making viewer software, this was not an unreasonable choice. But now we have to open this process up to allow interoperability with trusted agent and region domains.

In terms of the OGP Beta, this is likely not too onerous an administrative task. [note: the person who just wrote that is not, in fact, the person who would be fulfilling service requests, so your mileage may vary.] In the OGP Beta, we are not (yet) attempting to transer potentially sensitive assets and there are a relatively small number of region and agent domain operators.

So... the proposal is we (the community in general) move beyond Self-Signed Certs except for testing purposes.

The simplest way to meet the "move beyond self-signed certificates" requirement is for Linden Lab to operate a registration authority for the purpose of beginning the certification process for external agent and region domain operators.

Or we could use some set of common well-known CAs, like Verisign or somebody. Although they like charge money.

todo: fill out this section a touch more, maybe describing the process of registering a peer agent or region domain.

Specific Issues With OpenSim Software

note: Terevus, Zha, et al. do you want to add a few notes here?

Teravus: One thing to note here, however.. is you'll need to add your CA to the client's app_settings/CA.pem until the Linden/Verisign/Other CA process is worked out sufficiently. The directions for setting it up are in *svn*/share/junkCA

Certain things don't work in SSL mode now. For example: teleporting from Vaak to a SSL enabled OpenSimulator region fails because Vaak rejects self signed certificates and upon reading the response, it terminates the connection. (So in OpenSimulator, you'll see Vaak invoke the cap, but it'll still fail because vaak doesn't read the response)

Self Signed Certificates for Agent and Region Domain Authentication

Proposed Registration Authority for OpenSim Operators

Specific Issues With PyOGP Software

Note: Tao... Sai... I know we discussed this a bit... but i'm blanking on what we said... so feel free to add stuff here, otherwise i'm going to add my best guess regarding how we want to handle it

Discussions

  • Gridnauts IRC
    • Sepember 13